.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;} <$BlogRSDURL$>

Friday, July 30, 2004


I watched as much of the convention coverage as I could, and will do the same for the RNC (hopefully I'll be doing so from somewhere outside NYC).  I think it's important to hear the nominees explain their positions and detail their plans.  Mostly, though, I want to see them as they speak, look in their eyes, note their body languge.  That's my bullshit detector and it works well.  Last night I believed John Kerry, and in him I see a man who can lead effectively.  His rhetoric was not new, he borrowed it from Reagan.  He wants to make us proud again.  Some will say they are proud and don't need Kerry to win the affection of the world, but you can't smell the wind of change with your nose burried in Newsweek.  I wish that all americans were watching last night, because they would have seen what I saw, a man of conviction, promise, and hope for a better america.  I believe, and that's all I really want.

I saw most of his address and as objective and positive I can be considering the political infomercial aspect of the convention thing, and that there is a 50/50 chance he'll be our next executive I have these thoughts...

I felt good about the fact that he seemed strong on defense. He mentioned more than once that he wanted to build up our armed forces both with technology and recruits to cover the world�s hot spots more effectively. He is appealing to those moderate rep's disenchanted with W's intellectual capacity. This is the number one issue that drives my vote and I sense that there are many out there like me. At the same time, it would appear that if elected, Wes Clarke will end up in his cabinet and from all the first hand accounts my father has given me on Wes, he is a fence sitter when it comes to decision making. Kerry should keep Powell. He�d have my vote right now if he did. Without bashing Bush specifically, he sort of indicated that he would not have rushed into Iraq. Well, the guy voted for it and had access to the intel the decision was based on. That's a little flip-floppy to me.

I was very impressed that he refrained from outwardly bashing President Bush. This shows respect for the office, the man, and the war position our country is in. This scores major points with me again.

I sense there is a bit of a Libermann issues with Kerry. I happen to like Libermann very much as I do Zell Miller. My opinion is that Libermann took a lot of heat because his manner was unexcitable. His handlers no doubt pushed him to be more upbeat in his appearance and speaking which made him look insincere and awkward. Kerry is not a Bill Clinton type who exudes charisma. It's not his personality, but I'm sure he was given the same advice by his handlers, "Go out there and rile'em up John..." I know this is part of the whole convention/campaign thing, and I�m sure he hates having to ham it up himself and feels uncomfortable doing it, but he ought not to try to be something he�s not. Dick Cheney is a prime example of someone who disregarded the ham it up notion and just acted like himself, demure and quiet, and still found popularity during the first campaign. I don�t hold this against Kerry any more than I do W�s inability answer press questions without stumbling; it�s just not his thing. Why this factor is a little important for Kerry is that winning over the moderate and disenchanted Rep�s is how he�s going to win this squeaker in Nov. and while Bush can�t handle ad hoc Q&A, he is very believable and comfortable delivering heartfelt speeches (al la State Of The Union). Could be an edge for him in the infomercial world of campaign politics.
I'll let Jarvis speak for me here. See "Infantile Politics".

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?